This Project Veritasvideo makes a valid point: “gun free zones” are an open invitation to criminals. Anyone who publicly supports GFZ’s but isn’t willing to advertise that fact about their own property — out of concern for personal safety — is a hypocrite. It’s good enough for thee but not for me kinda deal.

I’d prefer to see confrontations with politicians over their use of armed guards. “Excuse me Mr. Bloomberg, is that man standing next to us armed?” Now that’s what I call hypocrisy. Still, a good time was had by all in this effort. Well, the filmmakers and fans of firearms freedom.

comments

I guess the difference is, the guy next to Bloomberg has training that he was required to complete lets prior to walking around with a gun for defense whereas the average gun owner only needs a couple bucks and a hero complex/paralyzingly feeling of inadequacy.

Keep telling yourself that buddy. Maybe if you wish hard enough, eat your vegetables, and ask Santa Claus you’ll finally get to shoot some minorities like you always wanted. I, myself, am a christian so not really on my to do list.

Oh good Lord you’re an idiot. If you actually have an interest in the subject you should go out and actually meet people. Are there racist a-holes with concealed carry permits out there? Of course. The vast majority find that carrying a gun acts to restrain behavior more than encourage bad behavior. The law holds you to a higher standard and anytime lethal force is used one of the first questions is “Did the person with the gun create the situation?”

Yup. Everyone who has a CCW (or equivalent) is a money-less fool with a hero-complex. The very idea of the Second Amendment is just a farce, and we all know that special priveleges bought through hard cash and training (i.e. more money) is *really* what this country is all about. I’m so glad you could translate this edict from from our betters like Obama, Bloomberg, Feinstein, Schumer, et al. Thanks.

Step one: come to terms with the fact that you’re not as important as Obama, Hilary, Bloomberg or…well just about anyone. Step two: grow a dick and stop being so scared all the time. Step three: put the gun away and relax in the knowledge that you’re going to be just fine. Step four: worry about something that might actually kill you, like your forced meat and cheese diet.

Should our wives, daughters, and mother’s also grow dicks and stop worrying about rapists?

If everyone will be just fine without a firearm, then how do you explain the 1+ million murders, brutal assaults, robberies, and rapes that the victims report to police every year? (And how do you explain the countless additional violent crimes that victims never report to police?)

Yay! Anti-gun “statistics!” So, Snake, as I’m sure you know, probabilities out of context are meaningless. That said, can you 1) tell us what the odds are that someone would kill their wife if there were not a gun in the house? Without that information, to say the odds “increase” is mere fear mongering, but you already knew that.

2) Can you tell us under what circumstances the probability might increase? Surely, a happily married couple wouldn’t have this problem, so this “statistic” can’t apply equally to all couples, can it? Was alcohol use factored in? What income brackets were the samples pulled from?

Finally, 3) can you tell us by what factor these odds will increase once a gun is present in the home? You may have to dig here- I’ll bet my bottom dollar that whoever gave you that cute, pre-packaged “fast fact” failed to include this critical information, without which, your “statistic” is meaningless. But again, you already knew that.

“Step one: come to terms with the fact that you’re not as important as Obama, Hilary, Bloomberg or…well just about anyone.”

Thank you. With that blatant projection, you just confirmed for me what I already suspected: Anti-gunners believe the lives of public servants are more valuable than their own. I actually feel sorry for you, and I don’t mean that as an insult. Try to understand- many people don’t think like you, which is to say, many people value their own lives and have a strong sense of self worth that they know cannot be protected by the police at all times. While you may think you’re an insect whose life deserves no protection, I submit that you are wrong, and strongly encourage you to take steps to bolster that self esteem of yours. Ok, pal? Now go get ’em!!!! You can do it!!!! We’re all rooting for you!!!!

“Statistically speaking, the person most likely to kill your wife is…wait for it…you! The chances of this happening actually rises when you have a gun in your house. So…you know good luck with that.”

You’re taking descriptive statistics and trying to make the prescriptive. Statistics can be useful for describing large populations, but the process starts breaking down once you decide to examine a specific individual. Statistically, more wives may be killed by their husbands than are killed by any other single cause (I haven’t seen the research on this, but for the sake of argument, I’ll take your word for it). This does NOT mean, however, that within a specific couple the husband is even likely to be responsible for his wife’s death, much less that he will be MORE likely than any other cause (I imagine the likelihoods would be based on numerous factors, including health of the relationship, responsibility of both parties, and how likely that specific wife is to be killed by other means).

As an analogy, statistics could tell us that about 20% of all M&M’s in a standard, Milk Chocolate package of M&M’s are blue. If I select a specific red M&M, however, it has a 0% chance of being blue, regardless of the statistics of the population.

Personally I carry a gun daily. I’m not worried about a specific threat in my relatively quiet bedroom community, I carry a gun because such a threat CAN occur and because I believe Americans should exercise their rights, and we’re better off collectively when we can do things for ourselves.

You do make a valid point that in terms of actual risk, yes, for most people there are a plethora of other things that wil kill them before being attacked by a criminal.

He’s right about one things – feeding shitbag trolls like Snake is a waste of time. I suggest disengaging. TTAG is a fun work distraction. As far as defending the second amendment we’re better off engaging people that are not either ignorant or close-minded.

I doubt it is possible to be less important to the functioning of the world than Bloomberg, and still posses 23 chromosomes. But if living your life bent over feels good, I suppose You’re free to pick any imaginary boyfriend you want.

Not sure how things are in New York, aside from them not being any kind of good. But in similarly intelectually challenged California, the guy who supposedly has enough “training” to parade around “protecting” some anointed dimbulb’s kid behind the walls of a gated community; somehow ceases, once he leaves said Fed and Taxpayer funded Disneyland-for-self-important rabble, to have enough training to be able to protect his own kid in Oakland.

Lol and you researched it too! Excellent you are defeating the trolls by spending your time entertaining me. Hold on let me throw some other stuff out there for you to refute…hmm…The UK and Australia as well as Japan have very low firearms related deaths. Go! Go to the internet and do my bidding! You guys are great. Thank you for that.

That doesn’t even require research. Why are gun deaths the only type of death you count? And the UK has a ridiculously high violent crime rate. The violent criminals don’t have to concern themselves with armed victims.

The U.K.and Australia both experienced a spike in violent crime and homicides immediately following the implementation of their gun control laws, interpreting fur them both the downward trend in those categories that most if the western world had enjoyed, even the U.S.with its increase in gun ownership and the expiration of its assault weapons ban. Crime in the uk is still higher than if that trend had not been interrupted.

I don’t know who guards Bloomie now, but as Mayor it was the NYPD. Are you familiar with the NYPD’s gunfire accuracy rates? They’re in the teens. Pathetic. Now, in fairness, not all of their shots that fail to hit their intended targets are complete fliers, whizzing by and hitting nothing. No, a great many of them strike innocent bystanders!

So much for NY’s infallible finest. You know, rather than impugning good people who just want to ensure their family’s safety by exercising, as a last resort, their right to self-defense, maybe you should focus on yourself? Rather than speculate about someone else’s supposed hero complex, why don’t you examine your own inferiority complex and obsession with police hero worship?

Aww it won’t let me respond to all of you guys, I know that makes you sad, but that’s okay. To answer some general questions. 1. The reason I pointed out you weren’t as important isn’t because I think your lives are less valuable, I hold all lives as valuable (unlike you all who think killing people is fine so long as you don’t go to prison for it). I pointed it out because you are highly unlikely to be the subjects of assassination attempts unlike the political figures mentioned (who seem to be the subject of much contempt in the gun owning community). 2. Your feelings of inadequacy will, unfortunately not go away just by responding to a troll on the internet, nor will owning a gun lift you out of poverty, make politicians care about your opinion or make you more educated. You will remain as irrelevant and unimportant as you were without it. Nothing you do will be heroic. Nothing you say will be enlightened. You are an embarrassing subculture in America much like Jugalos and Klansmen. I only hope that, someday, we will look back on this time from the proper side of history.

“…I hold all lives as valuable…”
It’s just that you hold politicians lives as so much more valuable that they should have the luxury of the protection of arms, while the people do not. I see.

“…unlike you all who think killing people is fine so long as you don’t go to prison for it…”

Killing people in self defense, yes. Murder, no. If gun owners thought “killing people is fine,” don’t you think that out of the 100 million+ gun owners in his country, you’d see a little more than 10,000 murders each year? No available data supports your suggestion. At all.

“I pointed it out because you are highly unlikely to be the subjects of assassination attempts unlike the political figures mentioned…”

That’s odd… So tell me who, precisely, is being murdered with guns in this country? I don’t even remember the last time I heard of a politician being assassinated. You and I do, however, both know that there are around 10,000 or so murders involving firearms each year, and the victims are never politicians. So, when you actually take the time to look at the data objectively, it turns out that we, the people, are infinitely more likely to be “assassinated” than any politician. I’m sure you’re good at other things.

Your arguments are ridiculous, and all you’re doing is fanning the flames because you seem to enjoy it. You do not advance your argument and you do not win hearts or minds. You’re part of the problem with the Internet and with argumentation as a whole.

1. I hold all lives as valuable. The last thing I ever want to do with any of my arms is kill someone. I can replace property- I can’t replace a person. As a result, any and all of my arms are wielding with extreme care and understanding. They are not toys, just like my car is not a toy.

2. I sometimes feel inadequate, like everyone does from time to time. My owning of arms does not turn me into Gun-Toting Adonis with a swelling Manhood of Incredible Caliber, mind full of visions of conquest.

Arms allow me to be self-sufficient, to target-shoot and to modify and accessorize something other than cars, bicycles or computers, all of which are also hobbies of mine. They’re also proof of freedom, a tangible benefit of living in the United States of America (‘Murica, F yeah!).

If you want to argue, reasonably, with someone about why arms, and firearms specifically, are not the problem in the world, I’m glad to hear it. Otherwise, you’re just not funny.

Hard to convince me that gun owners are a “sub culture” when national self-reported (volunteering to a phone survey caller that you have a gun in the home) household gun ownership is between 33% and 55% depending on the survey, and state-by-state numbers can be even higher (e.g. Alaska like 65%). And again, that’s self-reported. I wouldn’t answer that dang question to a person on the phone, nor would most gun owners I know, and the surveys are also asking only a single household resident if there are any guns owned by anyone living in the home (maybe there are but without the knowledge of the survey taker), so I firmly believe the results skew low of reality. At any rate, a sub culture it ain’t.

In fact, pro-gun events outnumber anti-gun events in a massive way, pro-gun YouTube videos get significantly more likes than anti-gun ones (which often have to disable comments and likes because of the massive negative reaction to them), feedback to politicians debating gun control legislation skews in favor of pro-gun by a landslide, national polling shows pro-gun opinion at a near all-time high including on ownership, no new gun control laws, legal concealed carry, stand your ground laws, and much more. Basically, I’d say Snake’s anti-gun crowd is the sub culture in this case, not the gun-owning crowd. The only embarrassment is how you project your opinions as the norm when the fact is all of the numbers, stats, surveys, and polls show quite the opposite — you’re the outlier.

So what , can’t take away everyone’s rights because of a few ‘ hero complexes ‘. If you use this reasoning you would have to ban Twinkies because some people don’t know when to stop eating them , you can’t ban sugar because some people become obese with it can you ? Ooops , as a Bloomberg supporter , I guess you can .

Every anti-2A advocate should be required to have a gun-free zone sign on their property — and it must be plainly visible, just like any 30.06 or 30.07 sign and in legal print that is at least 1″ tall. Or better yet, on their person.

If this is the strategy antis want the population to have, then their politicians and supporters should lead by example and do a live test for one year.

Best case scenario, Darwinism will take over and we will be rid of antis in record time.

The only downside is hypothetically if every anti did this, it would by default show where all the gun owners are. I imagine gun owners would start to band together lol.

We should develop one of those cool little twisty ribbon things like the pink for breast cancer or red for AIDS awareness or whatever and convince the anti 2A folks to wear it to show solidarity with the anti gun violence movement.

Anybody have an idea what we could fold up for them to wear on their lapels? Hunter orange comes to mind, since that’s what they tried to get people to wear for that lame protest day a while back.

So stick it in their front yards anyway. What’s the worse that can happen? You get a misdemeanor? I loved how Rangel got all “unpleasant” when confronted. They can dish it out, but can’t take it. Remember, it’s not about guns–it’s about power and control.
Having traveled to some very corrupt places in this world has given me a different view of American politics. Our politicians are as corrupt as anywhere else on earth including North Korea, Russia, and Iraq. They just do it on a larger scale and are a lot smoother.